Search results

After numerous examples and pages of discussion, what I find I dislike about the 4e presentation (and this extends to most of the other ones) is the amount of properties stated before the effect’s description. If these things are going to be there, I’d prefer they be integrated into the effect’s...

Shadowdark uses abstract distances. There’s only three: close (within 5′), near (up to 30′), and far (within sight). The use of cubes for spell areas isn’t explained. It’s presumably a concession to playing on a grid, but Shadowdark doesn’t mention playing on a grid at all. The spell description...

Short text can still be evocative. Shadowdark does a good job of this. These descriptions are short, but they pack a lot of punch.

That was from the PDF copy of the Moldvay Basic Set I downloaded from DM’s Guild. This is from the introduction to spells on B15. Edit: I went back and checked the fireball spells I posted. None of them had a duration in turns, so I assume we’re talking about the magic missile I posted. Fire...

A much older draft of my homebrew system took that approach. The spell conjured missiles of magical energy that you could direct at targets or save for later, having them orbit near you until used or for the spell’s duration. You could direct them later as an action against up to as many targets...

Possibly, but I think the idea of having magic missile last for a duration could be an interesting variant.

That seems to be the logical consequence of thinking of fireball as magically creating an explosion, but it may have been lost due to brevity. The PF1 version also leads with your generating a “searing explosion of flame” and only mentions the bead that’s projected in the second paragraph. Hmm...

Thanks for posting the updated version. It’s a little disappointing that the remastered rules still aren’t available on Archive of Nethys. I suppose I could buy the PDFs like I did 4e to get screenshots.

It’s alright I guess. I enjoyed playing in our Torchbearer 2e game, but I really didn’t like its conflict system.

Yeah, but we’re talking about which descriptions we prefer. I’m saying why AD&D’s doesn’t work for me even though it seemingly has more flavor.

See post #179. My issue with the AD&D fireball is more of an immersion/simulation one. Other than the nod to AD&D (“(it) blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame”), they seem mostly the same to me. I’d include 5e along with B/X (and OD&D, PF2, and 4e as well as Goblin Slayer TRPG)...

Yeah. The fireball described in AD&D is more like an instantaneously expanding, transient magical fire cloud. That’s not bad per se, but it doesn’t align with what I have in mind when I think of fireball. The B/X version is much closer.

I’m only using “blandness” as a point of reference. Personally, I more of a fan of the B/X version (and those similar to it). The more I try to think about the AD&D version, the less sense it makes to me.

I really liked Halls of the Blood King, but there were a few times I had trouble finding information when I needed it. Running a room as it came up? Worked great. Needing to go back? Less so. In retrospect, I should have prepared supplement notes for the NPCs, so I could have keyed entries for...